Literature DB >> 28964066

Discrimination and streaming of speech sounds based on differences in interaural and spectral cues.

Marion David1, Mathieu Lavandier2, Nicolas Grimault3, Andrew J Oxenham1.   

Abstract

Differences in spatial cues, including interaural time differences (ITDs), interaural level differences (ILDs) and spectral cues, can lead to stream segregation of alternating noise bursts. It is unknown how effective such cues are for streaming sounds with realistic spectro-temporal variations. In particular, it is not known whether the high-frequency spectral cues associated with elevation remain sufficiently robust under such conditions. To answer these questions, sequences of consonant-vowel tokens were generated and filtered by non-individualized head-related transfer functions to simulate the cues associated with different positions in the horizontal and median planes. A discrimination task showed that listeners could discriminate changes in interaural cues both when the stimulus remained constant and when it varied between presentations. However, discrimination of changes in spectral cues was much poorer in the presence of stimulus variability. A streaming task, based on the detection of repeated syllables in the presence of interfering syllables, revealed that listeners can use both interaural and spectral cues to segregate alternating syllable sequences, despite the large spectro-temporal differences between stimuli. However, only the full complement of spatial cues (ILDs, ITDs, and spectral cues) resulted in obligatory streaming in a task that encouraged listeners to integrate the tokens into a single stream.

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28964066      PMCID: PMC5617732          DOI: 10.1121/1.5003809

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am        ISSN: 0001-4966            Impact factor:   1.840


  27 in total

1.  Influence of spatial and temporal coding on auditory gap detection.

Authors:  A J Oxenham
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Build-up of the tendency to segregate auditory streams: resetting effects evoked by a single deviant tone.

Authors:  Nicholas R Haywood; Brian Roberts
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  The dominant role of low-frequency interaural time differences in sound localization.

Authors:  F L Wightman; D J Kistler
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1992-03       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Some characteristics of auditory spatial attention revealed using rhythmic masking release.

Authors:  Andrew J Sach; Peter J Bailey
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  2004-11

Review 5.  A matter of time: internal delays in binaural processing.

Authors:  Philip Joris; Tom C T Yin
Journal:  Trends Neurosci       Date:  2006-12-22       Impact factor: 13.837

6.  Sequential stream segregation of voiced and unvoiced speech sounds based on fundamental frequency.

Authors:  Marion David; Mathieu Lavandier; Nicolas Grimault; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2016-12-05       Impact factor: 3.208

7.  Minimum audible angle thresholds for broadband noise as a function of the delay between the onset of the lead and lag signals.

Authors:  D R Perrott; S Pacheco
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1989-06       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  A "rationalized" arcsine transform.

Authors:  G A Studebaker
Journal:  J Speech Hear Res       Date:  1985-09

9.  Primitive stream segregation of tone sequences without differences in fundamental frequency or passband.

Authors:  Brian Roberts; Brian R Glasberg; Brian C J Moore
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Objective and subjective measures of pure-tone stream segregation based on interaural time differences.

Authors:  Christian Füllgrabe; Brian C J Moore
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2012-07-04       Impact factor: 3.208

View more
  3 in total

1.  Spectro-temporal weighting of interaural time differences in speech.

Authors:  Lucas S Baltzell; Adrian Y Cho; Jayaganesh Swaminathan; Virginia Best
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2020-06       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  What Are You Waiting For? Real-Time Integration of Cues for Fricatives Suggests Encapsulated Auditory Memory.

Authors:  Marcus E Galle; Jamie Klein-Packard; Kayleen Schreiber; Bob McMurray
Journal:  Cogn Sci       Date:  2019-01

3.  Effect of age and hearing loss on auditory stream segregation of speech sounds.

Authors:  Marion David; Alexis N Tausend; Olaf Strelcyk; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2018-03-21       Impact factor: 3.208

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.